\
  The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
BackRefresh Options Favorite

Founding Fathers didn't draft the 2nd Amendment with guntoting niggers in mind

They clearly did not mean for niggers to carry firearms. Wh...
fragrant lay voyeur
  07/08/25
there was that UF or something law student posted about here...
Apoplectic supple property
  07/08/25
...
Ebony Razzle-dazzle Den
  07/08/25
the founding fathers' cost-benefit analysis for allowing a r...
fragrant lay voyeur
  07/08/25
100% interestingly, Switzerland also has a constitutional r...
Apoplectic supple property
  07/08/25
Correct. Most early “gun control” laws were spec...
Brindle high-end dysfunction
  07/08/25
...
Ebony Razzle-dazzle Den
  07/08/25
...
Brindle high-end dysfunction
  07/09/25
Or individuals of any race. They just didn't want to threate...
stirring half-breed
  07/09/25
No, even the militia-minded view was an individual right to ...
flesh theatre
  07/09/25
...
Big obsidian national dog poop
  07/09/25


Poast new message in this thread



Reply Favorite

Date: July 8th, 2025 10:41 AM
Author: fragrant lay voyeur

They clearly did not mean for niggers to carry firearms. Why is this never mentioned by originalists?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5747530&forum_id=2Reputation#49082201)



Reply Favorite

Date: July 8th, 2025 10:44 AM
Author: Apoplectic supple property

there was that UF or something law student posted about here a few weeks ago who wrote an article saying exactly this, that the originalist interpretation clearly means the freedom only applies to White people and was never intended for negros

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5747530&forum_id=2Reputation#49082215)



Reply Favorite

Date: July 8th, 2025 10:45 AM
Author: Ebony Razzle-dazzle Den



(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5747530&forum_id=2Reputation#49082217)



Reply Favorite

Date: July 8th, 2025 10:53 AM
Author: fragrant lay voyeur

the founding fathers' cost-benefit analysis for allowing a right to bear arms clearly assumed niggers would be in cages and not allowed to get anywhere near guns, ever

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5747530&forum_id=2Reputation#49082242)



Reply Favorite

Date: July 8th, 2025 11:01 AM
Author: Apoplectic supple property

100%

interestingly, Switzerland also has a constitutional right to bear arms *FOR CITIZENS* (it's a very heavily armed country), but the law also specifically *bans* foreigners of certain enumerated nationalities (a bunch of muslim and black african countries) resident in the country from owning arms

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5747530&forum_id=2Reputation#49082265)



Reply Favorite

Date: July 8th, 2025 11:37 AM
Author: Brindle high-end dysfunction

Correct. Most early “gun control” laws were specifically created with that purpose.

Hilariously, California had to cite some of these laws to defend its own shitlib gun control laws due to Thomas’ “history and tradition” test created in Bruen: https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2024-02-07/if-we-must-rely-on-history-and-tradition-to-assess-gun-laws-does-racist-history-count . Of course they added an “ith tho rathist” disclaimer.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5747530&forum_id=2Reputation#49082362)



Reply Favorite

Date: July 8th, 2025 11:39 AM
Author: Ebony Razzle-dazzle Den



(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5747530&forum_id=2Reputation#49082369)



Reply Favorite

Date: July 9th, 2025 1:40 AM
Author: Brindle high-end dysfunction



(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5747530&forum_id=2Reputation#49085166)



Reply Favorite

Date: July 9th, 2025 1:42 AM
Author: stirring half-breed

Or individuals of any race. They just didn't want to threaten state militia since there was no national army yet

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5747530&forum_id=2Reputation#49085168)



Reply Favorite

Date: July 9th, 2025 2:22 AM
Author: flesh theatre

No, even the militia-minded view was an individual right to own weapons suitable for militia use, because they also viewed the militia as checking state authority.

Here's an 1840 case taking this view https://guncite.com/court/state/21tn154.html ("If the citizens have these arms in their hands, they are prepared in the best possible manner to repel any encroachments upon their rights by those in authority.")

BTW, what army did George Washington command?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5747530&forum_id=2Reputation#49085182)



Reply Favorite

Date: July 9th, 2025 6:40 AM
Author: Big obsidian national dog poop



(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5747530&forum_id=2Reputation#49085300)